Lori Newcomer, Ph.D.
University of Missouri
February 2013

• Identify key features of multi-tiered systems of behavior support
• Review self-assessment and gap analysis process
2

• Clinic based interventions show rather large effect size; similar outcomes less prevalent in school settings.
• Build capacity to support implementation of researchbased interventions for students who require intensive support.
• Implementation requires organizational structures that facilitate effective teaming, data driven decision processes, and evaluation.
• Often a discrepancy exists between key system features that support intensive interventions and current status
3

Districts and schools are increasingly building capacity to implement prevention-based strategies to support positive student social behavior and address problem behavior. To build this capacity, schools are using a multi-tiered continuum model that was first developed for use in public health systems (Walker et al. 1996).
4

• Primary Prevention seeks to prevent harm
• Secondary Prevention seeks to reverse harm
• Tertiary Prevention seeks to reduce harm
Walker & Sprague, 2002
5

a) Provide all students with universal supports b) Screen students to determine needed services c) Deliver a continuum of services matched to the level of support indicated by screening and assessment.
(Horner, Sugai, Todd, & Lewis-Palmer, 2005; Lane & Menzies, 2003; Nelson, Martella, &
Marchand-Martella, 2002; Sprick, Sprick, & Garrison, 1992)
6

Secondary Prevention (Tier 2)
Evidence-based intervention(s) of moderate intensity that address the learning or behavior challenge of most at-risk students
≈ 5%
Tertiary Prevention (Tier 3)
Individualized intervention(s) of increased intensity for students who show minimal response to secondary prevention
≈ 15%
Primary Prevention (Tier I)
High-quality core instruction that meets the needs of most students
≈ 80% of Students
7

• Addresses function of behavior to enhance needs of individuals and specific support strategies
• Prevents problem behavior through environmental redesign
• Provides active instruction of desired behaviors
• Organizes consequences that promote desired behavior, minimizes rewards for problem behavior, and provides consequences for problem behavior
Carr et al., 2002
8

Successful individual student behavior support is linked to host environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, durable, salable, & logical for all students
(Zins & Ponti, 1990)
9

A systems approach to establish the social culture and individualized behavior supports to create a safe, effective learning environment for all students
(Colvin, Kame’enui & Sugai, 1993; Sprick, Sprick & Garrison, 1992; Walker et al.,
1996)
10

11

• Measurable academic and social behavior outcomes
• Grounded in data-based decision making
• Evidence-based interventions
• Operational procedures, processes, and administrative systems designed to increase accuracy and durability of practice implementation
 (Sugai & Horner, 2002; Sugai, Horner, McIntosh., 2008)
12

• A systematic process for determining and addressing needs, or "gaps" between current conditions and requisite conditions.
• The discrepancy between the current condition and requisite condition is used to guide action planning
• Purpose is to direct resources to establish and strengthen the implementation of strategic system features that are prerequisites to the ability to develop and effectively deliver intensive interventions that are driven by data.
13

Needs Assessment
Action steps to close the gap
Desired Status
Deficiencies or
“gap” between current and desired status
“Needs”
Current Status
14

Needs Assessment
What action steps are necessary to close the gap?
What strategic system features facilitate intensive behavior supports
What is the
“gap” between the current status and the desired status?
What strategic system features are in place?
15

 Two components
• Self-assessment questionnaire
• Gap analysis interview
16

Initial Self-Assessment
 Appraise status of multi-tier supports and organizational structures necessary to develop and deliver intensive interventions that are driven by data
Gap Analysis
 Strategic Features
 Current Status
 Deficiencies (gaps)
 Guiding thoughts
 Future action
17

• Completed by team (administrator, counselor, special educator, general educator, Title I teacher, reading specialist, other personnel associated with school discipline data and intervention efforts).
• Team response can reveal gaps between written policy and actual practice.
18

1.
School uses a school-wide approach to reinforce appropriate social behavior (e.g. SWPBIS, BEST,
Character Education).
2.
Expectations and routines are defined and explicitly taught for all settings.
3.
Students are reinforced for following rules and expectations.
4.
There are clear, written procedures that lay out the process for handling both major and minor discipline incidents, including crisis situations.
19

4.
Staff are informed and consistent about which behaviors are staff/classroom managed and which behaviors are handled by office or administrators
5.
A data system is used to collect and analyze office referral data; data are used to guide decisions regarding behavior instruction, interventions and prevention efforts
6.
Data reflect that most students (> 80%) receive less than
1 office referral per year.
20

7.
Teams identify the percentage of students receiving Tier
2/Targeted intervention supports.
8.
A Behavior Support Team exists to receive requests for assistance, develop support plans, and monitor intervention results
9.
Data are used to identify students who may need Tier 2 and 3 supports
10.
Personnel are designated to coordinate targeted and intensive intervention across all students.
21

11.
A consistent decision process to match students with appropriate Tier 2 intervention.
12.
A procedure to track all students on targeted and intensive interventions.
13.
All Tier 2 strategies are assessed for critical intervention components and adhere to guidelines ( see Tier 2
Intervention and Component analysis )
22

Tier 2 Intervention Audit and Component Analysis
Tier 2 supports include (a) targeted interventions, (b) small group interventions, and (c) simple function based individual supports. a) Targeted interventions address the needs of a specific group of students by increasing structure and predictability, the intensity of instruction and the frequency of contingent feedback. b) Small group interventions include specially designed small-group instruction and counseling interventions provided by school psychologists, school social workers, school counselors and other behavior specialists c) Simple function based individual interventions may include prevention-based strategies that address setting events, antecedents, social and communication skills, strategies for increasing reinforcement for using positive social replacement skills, and decreasing reinforcement for problem behavior.
Enter the name of each targeted interventions delivered in your school. For each intervention component, determine if there is documentation that the component is in place (1) or if there is no documentation regarding the intervention component (0). Typical targeted interventions include Check-in Check-out, Social Skills Instruction, Check and Connect, and Organization Skills
Targeted Interventions
Intervention Name
1.
There is a designated coordinator and personnel to deliver the intervention
2.
Intervention has operational definition of target behavior/skill deficit
3.
Intervention has operational definition of replacement behavior/skill development
4.
Intervention has written materials that describe core features, functions, and systems of strategy
5.
Intervention has written procedures for implementation
6.
Intervention has written procedures to teach replacement behavior
7.
Staff have been trained on responsibilities and how to implement intervention
8.
Intervention has written data decision rules to match student with strategy
23

9.
Intervention has written data-based guidelines for when to fade or intensify
10.
Intervention fidelity is assessed on a regular basis
11.
Intervention has procedure for progress monitoring
12.
13.
14.
Student progress is monitored at least weekly
Overall intervention effectiveness is monitored monthly
Intervention includes frequent communication with family
15.
Intervention is implemented within 3 days of determination that student should receive intervention
16.
Formal procedures exist to notify teacher(s) involved with student about student’s participation
17.
Orientation materials provide information for a student to get started on the intervention.
18.
Opportunities to practice new skills are provided daily
Score /18 /18 /18 /18
24

14.
Students are appropriately identified and provided with intensive supports.
15.
A team exists that builds and implements individual behavior support plans.
16.
Team members have sufficient formal training in
Functional Assessment and evidence-based interventions.
25

17.
The school/district has written procedures on how to conduct a Functional Assessment
18.
Data are used to monitor fidelity of implementation of individual intensive supports
19.
Coaching or some other form of support is available to teachers to assist them in implementing intensive interventions as designed.
26

• Clarifying questions listed to help discern how current practices differ from full implementation of strategic features.
• Questions designed to identify deficiencies in training, resource allocation, planning, or accurate implementation related to the strategic feature.
• Team determines what needs to be in place to close the gap.
• Needs are prioritized and translated into action statements.
27

NCII Self-Assessment Gap Analysis
The gap-analysis is formatted for use by an external consultant and is designed to be used with the Self-Assessment Questionnaire to determine the current status of behavior support and deficiencies across Tiers 1, 2 and 3. The Gap Analysis is divided into four areas:
1.
Strategic Feature: The first column on the left identifies a strategic feature of behavior support that corresponds with each question on the
Self-Assessment Questionnaire. Strategic features are considered key elements of a systemic, multi-tiered approach to prevention and intervention of problem behaviors.
2.
Current Status: The second column provides guiding questions that can be used to probe for additional information to determine the quality and integrity of implementation for each item. When a team reports that a feature is in place, these clarifying questions can help determine if actions are needed to strengthen the implementation of the feature. For example, a team may report that the school has a schoolwide approach to proactive discipline in place; however the clarifying questions may indicate that professional development and consistency
3.
4.
5.
Status
Current
Status the implementation of the strategic feature.
“Gap”
Action
Guiding Thoughts: The fourth column provides guiding thoughts and suggestions for action steps when deficiencies are noted.
Items
Tier 1: Primary Prevention
Strategic Feature
Clarifying Questions &
Current Status

Consensus among behavior support team regarding status of features.
•Were there specific barriers to having a team collaborate on completing the questionnaire?
Needs Guiding Thoughts

Administrators may report that procedures exist and are documented; however including other staff in the self-assessment process can reveal gaps between written policy and actual practice.

If assessment was completed only by administrative staff, include other staff in
Recommendation for
Future Action
28

Tier 1
Strategic Feature
• An efficient data system is used to collect and analyze office referral data.
• Data are used to guide decisions regarding instruction, interventions, and prevention efforts.
Clarifying Questions Closing the Gap
• Who reviews the data?
• How frequently is it reviewed?
• What are the guidelines or cut points to indicate when a student needs additional support?
• System to review ODR and suspension rates as a reflection of overall school climate.
• System to use ODR to identify students or teachers that may be in need of additional support
• Establish data decision rules
• Arrange professional development in data analysis and decision making
29

Tier 2
Strategic Feature
• Data are used to identify students who may need Tier 2 and 3 supports
Clarifying Questions Closing the Gap
• What data are used to determine which students need additional help?
• Have specific cut points or decision rules been established?
• How often is the data reviewed?
• Who reviews the data?
• Establish schedule and decision rules to identify students who are not responsive to
Tier 1.
30

Tier 3
Strategic Feature
• Data are used to monitor the progress of students on individual support plans
Clarifying Questions Closing the Gap
• Who is responsible for collecting and analyzing the data?
• Are there guidelines or decision rules based on the data to guide intervention revisions?
• How is the data shared with relevant stakeholders?
• Are data graphically displayed?
Possible areas for professional development and technical support:
• Data/progress monitoring systems
• Excel spreadsheets
31

 Yes
Continue with follow-up interview to assess current level of Tier 2 supports
 No
Provide contact information for state or regional PBIS
Coordinator to request information on training and technical assistance http://pbis.org/links/pbis_network/default.aspx
32

 Data-based decision rules to identify students who need
Tier 2 support have not been identified.
 Tier 2 interventions often lack the critical components of effective intervention strategies.
 Absence of adequate progress monitoring
 Absence of fidelity measures
33

• Efficient systems at the Tier 1 and Tier 2 level enhance schools’ ability to effectively provide intensive behavioral support for the most challenging students.
• Build Tier 3 systems on adequate Tier 1 and Tier 2 systems
• The devil is in the details
34

References
Carr, E.,G., Dunlap, G., Horner, R.H., Koegel, R.L., Turnbull, A.P., Sailor, W., et al. (2002).
Positive behavior support: Evolution of an applied science. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 4(1), 4-16.
Colvin, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Sugai, G. (1993). Reconceptualizing behavior management and schoolwide discipline in general education. Education and Treatment of Children,16,
361-381.
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Todd, A. W., & Lewis-Palmer, T. (2005). School-wide positive behavior support. Individualized supports for students with problem behaviors: Designing positive behavior plans , 359-390.
Lane, Kathleen L., and Holly M. Menzies (2003). The effects of a school-based primary intervention program: Preliminary outcomes . Preventing School Failure 47.1 (2003): 26-
32.
35

References
Nelson, J. Ron, Ronald M. Martella, and Nancy Marchand-Martella (2002). "Maximizing
Student Learning The Effects of a Comprehensive School-Based Program for Preventing
Problem Behaviors." Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 10.3 (2002): 136-
148.
Sprick, R., Sprick, M., & Garrison, M. (1992). Foundations: Developing positive school-wide discipline policies. Longmont, CO: Sopris West .
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. Child & Family Behavior Therapy , 24 (1-2), 23-50.
Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., & McIntosh, K. (2008). Best practices in developing a broad-scale system of support for school-wide positive behavior support. Best practices in school psychology V , 3 , 765-780.
36

References
Walker, H. M., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Bullis, M., Sprague, J. R., Bricker, D., & Kaufman,
M. J. (1996). Integrated approaches to preventing antisocial behavior patterns among school-age children and youth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders , 4 (4),
194-209.
Zins, J. E., & Ponti, C. R. (1990). Strategies to facilitate the implementation, organization, and operation of system-wide consultation programs. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation , 1 (3), 205-218.
Walker, H.M., & Sprague, J. (2002). Intervention strategies for diverting at-risk children and youth from destructive outcomes. Report on Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in
Youth, 1, 5-8, 18-19.
37

This webinar was produced under the U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No.
H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project officer.
The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or polices of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this website is intended or should be inferred.

Lori Newcomer, Ph.D.
E-Mail: NewcomerL@missouri.edu
University of Missouri, 16 Hill Hall
Columbia, MO 65211
General Information: 800-356-2735
Website: www.intensiveintervention.org
39

While permission to redistribute this webinar is not necessary, the citation should be:
National Center on Intensive Intervention. (2013).
Support Systems for Intense Behaviors: Conducting a School-wide Needs Assessment . Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs, National Center on Intensive
Intervention.

Thank you for participating in this NCII Webinar! We are very interested in your experience, and would like to ensure future Webinars are presented effectively. Please take a moment to click the link below and fill out this survey —it will take you 5 minutes ! https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/R9GN2QY
Your browser will be re-routed to this link after the presentation.